47 messages in org.freebsd.freebsd-currentRe: Some performance measurements on ...| From | Sent On | Attachments |
|---|---|---|
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 19, 2012 6:12 am | |
| Slawa Olhovchenkov | Apr 19, 2012 11:53 am | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 19, 2012 1:05 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 19, 2012 1:26 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 19, 2012 1:34 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 19, 2012 2:03 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 19, 2012 2:06 pm | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 19, 2012 2:11 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 19, 2012 2:17 pm | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 19, 2012 2:19 pm | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 19, 2012 2:26 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 19, 2012 2:35 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 19, 2012 2:36 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 19, 2012 2:43 pm | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 19, 2012 3:36 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 19, 2012 11:16 pm | |
| Alexander V. Chernikov | Apr 20, 2012 1:26 am | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 20, 2012 2:00 am | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 20, 2012 2:25 am | |
| John Baldwin | Apr 20, 2012 5:11 am | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 20, 2012 7:26 am | |
| K. Macy | Apr 20, 2012 9:28 am | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 20, 2012 11:46 am | |
| Bruce Evans | Apr 20, 2012 11:33 pm | |
| Adrian Chadd | Apr 21, 2012 7:14 pm | |
| K. Macy | Apr 22, 2012 7:04 am | |
| Andre Oppermann | Apr 24, 2012 6:16 am | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 24, 2012 6:44 am | |
| Li, Qing | Apr 24, 2012 7:15 am | |
| K. Macy | Apr 24, 2012 8:03 am | |
| K. Macy | Apr 24, 2012 8:05 am | |
| Luigi Rizzo | Apr 24, 2012 9:16 am | |
| K. Macy | Apr 24, 2012 9:18 am | |
| Fabien Thomas | Apr 24, 2012 9:34 am | |
| Li, Qing | Apr 24, 2012 10:39 am | |
| Li, Qing | Apr 24, 2012 10:42 am | |
| Bjoern A. Zeeb | Apr 24, 2012 5:01 pm | |
| Maxim Konovalov | Apr 25, 2012 2:21 am | |
| Slawa Olhovchenkov | Apr 25, 2012 3:19 am | |
| K. Macy | Apr 25, 2012 8:44 am | |
| Bjoern A. Zeeb | Apr 25, 2012 11:53 am | |
| George Neville-Neil | May 1, 2012 7:27 am | |
| Luigi Rizzo | May 1, 2012 8:21 am | |
| George Neville-Neil | May 1, 2012 10:33 am | |
| Bjoern A. Zeeb | May 1, 2012 2:08 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | May 1, 2012 2:22 pm | |
| Luigi Rizzo | May 3, 2012 9:32 am |
| Subject: | Re: Some performance measurements on the FreeBSD network stack | |
|---|---|---|
| From: | K. Macy (kma...@freebsd.org) | |
| Date: | Apr 24, 2012 8:05:01 am | |
| List: | org.freebsd.freebsd-current | |
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 5:03 PM, K. Macy <kma...@freebsd.org> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Li, Qing <qing...@bluecoat.com> wrote:
From previous tests, the difference between flowtable and
routing table was small with a single process (about 5% or 50ns in the total packet processing time, if i remember well), but there was a large gain with multiple concurrent processes.
Yes, that sounds about right when we did the tests a long while ago.
Removing flowtable increases the cost in ip_output() (obviously) but also in ether_output() (because the route does not have a lle entry so you need to call arpresolve on each packet).
Yup.
So in revising the route lookup i believe it would be good if we could also get at once most of the info that ether_output() is computing again and again.
Well, the routing table no longer maintains any lle info, so there isn't much to copy out the rtentry at the completion of route lookup.
If I understood you correctly, you do believe there is a lot of value in Flowtable caching concept, but you are not suggesting we reverting back to having the routing table maintain L2 entries, are you ?
One could try a similar conversion of the L2 table to an rmlock without copy while lock is held.
Odd .. *with* copy while lock is held.
-Kip
_______________________________________________ free...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "free...@freebsd.org"